Some English words only differ in their vowels: crisscross, dillydally, riffraff, etc. Is there a name for them?
-
related to Source of “-bie” in “freebie” – Cameron Sep 03 '12 at 21:01
4 Answers
Frozen reduplicative phrases like these, especially ones made of nonsense or phonosemantic roots like riffraff or hocus-pocus, are simply called Freezes in the literature, following Cooper and Ross 1975*, the first study to investigate them thoroughly.
Of course, freezes like hocus-pocus don't vary the vowels but the consonants. There is to my knowledge no fancy name for freezes that vary only their vowels.
Cooper and Ross* note that there are a number of reasons, some phonological and some semantic, that explain why one does not find reverse freezes like
*raffriff, *pocus-hocus, *crosscriss, *dallydilly
*William E. Cooper and John Robert Ross, 1975. "World Order" in Grossman, San, & Vance, eds. Papers from the Parasession on Functionalism, Chicago Linguistic Society.
- 107,887
-
1That's an interesting link, but it gives a pretty big list of "sort collation" principles governing the sequence of "freezes". I don't know if there's any prioritisation in the list, but I tried driving a "coach and horses" through it. On that basis, the first possibility was *animate (men and machines), which failed, followed by front (fore and aft)* and *agentive (subject and object)* which worked. But when I got to *power source (horse and carriage), it started to unravel for me. Why should horse* precede carriage, but coach precede horses? – FumbleFingers Sep 03 '12 at 23:04
-
1hocus-pocus is often said to be a snide description of transubstantiation and a parody of the Latin words of institution hoc est corpus (this is [my] body). – Henry Sep 03 '12 at 23:04
-
These are not rules for how to generate them; these are apparently simply rules that people use to make sense of them and that seem to govern their sense of how things go together. The interesting part is that for the most part the phonological and semantic distinctions are parallel in both meaningful and non-meaningful freezes. – John Lawler Sep 03 '12 at 23:15
-
1@John: Yeah, I do realise they're effectively "post-factum rationalisations". But to be honest, it seemed to me that below a certain level of detail they're in danger of becoming inconsistent. The biggest factor is probably just that *most important (biggest, nearest, etc.)* normally comes first. So your father introduces you and your wife to others as John and Jane, whereas your father-in-law will probably introduce you as Jane and John. – FumbleFingers Sep 03 '12 at 23:38
-
1Yup. That's why fixed phrases are important. Nonce conjunctions like John and Jane are going to follow other conventions in context. What the patterns in Cooper and Ross show is that there are large-scale trends that aren't necessarily definitive, but show the drift. Like Jupiter's gravity sweeping the asteroids in its orbit into the Trojan Lagrange points. – John Lawler Sep 03 '12 at 23:59
-
I see that Lewis Carrol’s “The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!” fits your pattern. – tchrist Sep 04 '12 at 00:13
-
Not my pattern; Cooper and Ross were the ones who discovered it. I remember clearly how well-received their paper was, because I gave a paper (on a completely different topic, natch) at that meeting, too. – John Lawler Sep 04 '12 at 00:34
-
1I've seen these described as "ablaut reduplication", and a quick Google search shows this terminology is not totally unknown. [http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=107947] [http://www.dailywritingtips.com/the-nitty-gritty-about-reduplication/] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplication#English] – nohat Dec 10 '13 at 08:25
-
1There are always news terms. Because the same phenomena are being rediscovered constantly, by people who learned a different theory and weren't taught anything but what was hot and new, and consequently aren't familiar with the old term. Since linguistic theories change about as frequently as Windows versions -- and with about as much improvement and grace -- this means that terminology without examples is useless outside one's speech community. Which is by now pretty balkanized. – John Lawler Dec 10 '13 at 15:20
-
1@JohnLawler Looking at the interesting data from Thcrist below, it seems to me that C&R got it wrong on the formant frequencies. It's F1, not F2 that counts most. There's only one exception in TC's list: head-hid [the item loch leech doesn't count for obvious reasons]. – Araucaria - Him Nov 30 '15 at 12:28
It’s called reduplication. You find it in such words as zigzag and mishmash. It’s especially common in hyphenated words like chit-chat and teeter-totter. Here is a selection of such from the OED:
bibble-babble drip-drop moon-man shiffle-shuffle tisty-tosty
bing-bang fible-fable muster-master shilly-shally tit-tat
bingle-bangle fiddle-faddle niddle-noddle shim-sham titter-totter
chiff-chaff filly-folly niddy-noddy sing-song tittle-tattle
chip-chop fingle-fangle nid-nod skimble-skamble titty-totty
chit-chat fix-fax niff-naff slipper-slopper tric-trac
chitter-chatter flim-flam niggers-noggers slip-slap trim-tram
chuffe-chaffe flip-flap nig-nog slip-slop tringum-trangum
click-clack flip-flop ning-nong smick-smack trinkum-trankum
clink-clank flipperty-flopperty peat-pot snick-snack trittle-trattle
clinkum-clankum fribble-frabble pid-pad snipper-snapper trit-trot
clip-clop gibble-gabble ping-pong snip-snap twiddle-twaddle
clipper-clapper giff-gaff pip-pop spitter-spatter twingle-twangle
clish-clash head-hid pish-pash splish-splash whimsy-whamsy
clitter-clatter higgle-haggle pit-pat splishy-splashy whim-wham
clush-clash hip-hop pitter-patter squish-squash whitter-whatter
coon-can hirrie-harrie plip-plop swing-swang whittie-whattie
crick-crack jibber-jabber pot-peat swish-swash wibble-wobble
crickle-crackle jiggy-joggy prittle-prattle switter-swatter wibbly-wobbly
crinkle-crankle jim-jam ribble-rabble teenty-taunty widdle-waddle
crinkly-crankly jingle-jangle rickety-rackety teeny-tiny wiggle-waggle
crinkum-crankum kim-kam ric-rac tick-tack wiggly-waggly
criss-cross knick-knack riff-raff tick-tock wig-wag
dibble-dabble knit-knot rip-rap ticky-tacky wimble-wamble
diddle-daddle Lib-Lab rittle-rattle tig-tag wimbly-wambly
dilly-dally ling-long rope-ripe tingle-tangle wish-wash
dimber-damber loch-leech scribble-scrabble ting-tang wishy-washy
dindle-dandle micro-macro scrip-scrap tinkle-tankle wringle-wrangle
ding-dong mingle-mangle scritch-scratch tipsy-topsy
dingle-dangle mish-mash sheet-shot tip-tap
dingle-dongle mixty-maxty shick-shack tip-top
Those all match the (ir)regular expression
^
(\w+) ([aeiouy]+) (\w+)
-
\1 (?! \2 ) [aeiouy]+ \3
$
. . . which is how I found them.
EDIT
Here’s the same list after running John’s pipeline. I’ve right-justified them so it lines up more interestingly.
Lib-Lab jingle-jangle clish-clash slip-slap pit-pat
ric-rac mingle-mangle clush-clash snip-snap tit-tat
tric-trac wringle-wrangle splish-splash rip-rap sheet-shot
pid-pad tingle-tangle mish-mash scrip-scrap knit-knot
head-hid twingle-twangle pish-pash tip-tap peat-pot
nid-nod dingle-dongle squish-squash hip-hop trit-trot
chuffe-chaffe crickle-crackle wish-wash chip-chop fix-fax
hirrie-harrie crinkle-crankle swish-swash clip-clop niddy-noddy
whittie-whattie tinkle-tankle shick-shack flip-flop jiggy-joggy
fible-fable rittle-rattle click-clack plip-plop splishy-splashy
bibble-babble prittle-prattle smick-smack slip-slop wishy-washy
dibble-dabble trittle-trattle knick-knack pip-pop ticky-tacky
gibble-gabble tittle-tattle snick-snack drip-drop wibbly-wobbly
ribble-rabble rope-ripe crick-crack tip-top wimbly-wambly
scribble-scrabble giff-gaff tick-tack jibber-jabber wiggly-waggly
fribble-frabble chiff-chaff tick-tock dimber-damber crinkly-crankly
wibble-wobble niff-naff clink-clank clipper-clapper dilly-dally
skimble-skamble riff-raff shim-sham snipper-snapper shilly-shally
wimble-wamble tig-tag whim-wham slipper-slopper filly-folly
diddle-daddle wig-wag jim-jam muster-master teeny-tiny
fiddle-faddle bing-bang kim-kam chitter-chatter whimsy-whamsy
widdle-waddle ting-tang flim-flam whitter-whatter tipsy-topsy
twiddle-twaddle swing-swang trim-tram clitter-clatter rickety-rackety
niddle-noddle ding-dong tringum-trangum pitter-patter teenty-taunty
dindle-dandle ling-long clinkum-clankum spitter-spatter flipperty-flopperty
shiffle-shuffle ning-nong crinkum-crankum switter-swatter tisty-tosty
higgle-haggle ping-pong trinkum-trankum titter-totter titty-totty
wiggle-waggle sing-song coon-can niggers-noggers mixty-maxty
bingle-bangle nig-nog moon-man criss-cross
dingle-dangle loch-leech micro-macro pot-peat
fingle-fangle scritch-scratch flip-flap chit-chat
And here are some that differ in the initial consonant cluster:
sea-flea splash-dash pop-shop hurdy-gurdy
sea-pea rush-bush top-crop rowdy-dowdy
fa-la sci-fi pop-top crowdy-mowdy
tirra-lirra hi-fi fender-bender hokey-cokey
hob-job Wi-Fi gender-bender hokey-pokey
hob-nob demi-semi hugger-mugger lovey-dovey
club-drub tutti-frutti killer-diller ruffy-tuffy
dead-head jack-back pooper-scooper piggy-wiggy
seed-bed back-pack super-duper hootchy-kootchy
wed-bed pack-track water-skater ricky-ticky
zed-bed pack-sack helter-skelter mifky-pifky
seed-weed back-tack whister-clister hanky-panky
shagged-ragged nick-stick pitter-litter minky-winky
skid-lid rick-stick butter-cutter hooky-crooky
mind-blind rock-cock fair-hair sally-fly
hoard-ward cock-block hurr-burr dry-fly
soogee-moogee stock-lock dos-à-dos Piggly-Wiggly
tee-hee smock-frock hocus-pocus higly-pigly
hokee-pokee cook-book holus-bolus jelly-belly
hodge-podge fal-lal rat-bat willy-nilly
boogie-woogie pall-mall float-boat lilly-pilly
walkie-talkie pell-mell rat-tat nilly-willy
nookie-bookie will-gill night-light trolly-lolly
curlie-wurlie trill-rill night-sight roly-poly
peepie-creepie noll-kholl light-tight hurly-burly
tulyie-mulyie tol-lol tit-bit curly-wurly
hubble-bubble wham-bam hot-shot miminy-piminy
scamble-shamble william-nilliam pot-shot niminy-piminy
ramble-scramble ram-jam root-knot toy-boy
nimble-pimble cram-jam hot-pot shoy-hoy
humble-jumble ram-stam nut-cut nimpy-pimpy
mumble-jumble hirdum-dirdum tohu-bohu rumpy-pumpy
rumble-jumble heckum-peckum yaw-haw happy-clappy
rumble-tumble harum-scarum tow-row hickery-pickery
double-trouble rum-strum kow-tow shimmery-whimmery
toodle-loodle rum-tum bow-wow quavery-mavery
raggle-taggle pan-man Tex-Mex dry-fry
ringle-jingle fan-tan lay-day rory-tory
keckle-meckle ran-tan play-day cherry-merry
hustle-bustle fen-phen May-day hurry-burry
razzle-dazzle sin-bin pay-day hurry-scurry
prime-time lin-pin nay-say teensy-weensy
ruff-scuff non-con play-way hotsy-totsy
huff-duff Hobson-Jobson rubby-dubby slawsy-gawsy
shag-bag bon-ton namby-pamby highty-tighty
rag-bag loco-foco hiddy-giddy hoity-toity
shag-rag Neo-Geo hoddy-doddy ranty-tanty
tag-rag yoo-hoo coddy-moddy humpty-dumpty
rag-tag to-fro hoddy-noddy flibberty-gibberty
gang-bang snap-cap fuddy-duddy twisty-wisty
mincing-pincing rap-tap higgledy-piggledy nitty-gritty
wing-ding drip-tip handy-dandy tuzzy-muzzy
fog-dog stump-jump randy-dandy fuzzy-wuzzy
catch-match cop-shop lardy-dardy
hotch-potch slop-shop hirdy-girdy
- 134,759
-
2If you have them one-to-a-line in a file,
rev file | sort | rev > mirrorfileto have them reverse-alphabetized, which gets interesting groupings. – John Lawler Sep 03 '12 at 20:59 -
1@JohnLawler I agree very much, and often do that. I have my own tool for reverse alphabetizing, but that is close enough. Just a sec and I’ll update. – tchrist Sep 03 '12 at 21:03
-
7High vowel comes before low vowel, and front vowel comes before back vowel, and quite often both; in almost every case. – John Lawler Sep 03 '12 at 21:12
-
1@JohnLawler And the cases where it doesn’t do so seem to be separate coinages, like pot-peat and moon-man. And rope-ripe. – tchrist Sep 03 '12 at 21:12
-
2
-
@LarsH The OP doesn’t say what he’s talking about, and has never bothered to accept an answer to any of his questions. I’m not really interested in putting more effort in unless he does. If you are, by all means go ahead and do so. – tchrist Sep 03 '12 at 21:43
-
@tchrist: I didn't mean to denigrate your contribution - I just didn't think "reduplication" was as specific as what the OP is asking about. But since then, I decided I need to check on the def. of reduplication. However the OP does offer an explanation of why he doesn't accept answers. – LarsH Sep 03 '12 at 21:46
-
What I mean by that is that "reduplication" can cover many other phenomena, including the duplication of a single consonant, or the duplication of a word with no change at all. AFAIK Lawler is right that the specific term for the examples given is "freeze", though why it's called that I have no idea. – LarsH Sep 03 '12 at 22:00
-
1@LarsH Yes, reduplication doesn’t have to be the entire word. Another term the OED uses for this sort of thing sometimes is echoic. John has my vote: I have the Sportsmanship badge, after all. :) – tchrist Sep 03 '12 at 22:04
-
But ... but ... I don't see orky-dorky on any of those lists! – James Waldby - jwpat7 Sep 04 '12 at 00:43
-
3Pfft! How come I knew who posted this answer before I was halfway through reading it? – Sep 04 '12 at 02:52
-
1@jwpat7 That’s because it doesn’t differ either in its vowel or in its initial consonant cluster. My pattern didn’t detect a missing one consonant cluster on one of the pairs. Controlling for that yields airy-fairy, antsy-pantsy, argle-bargle, artsy-fartsy, easy-peasy, eel-weel, evo-devo, inky-pinky, itsy-bitsy, itty-bitty, over-lover, ownty-downty, uh-huh to add to the list. – tchrist Sep 04 '12 at 04:16
-
2In 'The Language Instinct' Steven Pinker discusses why in such pairs the low front vowel precedes the high back one. It is, he suggests, because the former is associated with the here and now and the latter with things more distant. – Barrie England Sep 04 '12 at 06:26
-
1@BarrieEngland I think that is really reaching. It seems more that it is the natural order of opening one’s mouth from an initial closed position; exhalation or relaxation. Still, there is a theory (whose name escapes me for the nonce) about the universality across unrelated languages of perceiving things like click as sharper and tighter compared with floppy, squishy things like bong. – tchrist Sep 04 '12 at 14:35
-
-
@DavidWallace because if someone else had posted it, it'd be half as long? :) – Mr. Shiny and New 安宇 Oct 15 '12 at 14:55
-
@JohnLawler I don't see any evidence at all for front before back. All the evidence points exclusively to close before open, at least in RP. Considering those that don't have FLEECE or KIT as the first vowel concerned, we are left with chuffe-chaffe, clush-clash, coon-can, micro-macro, moon-man, muster master, rope-ripe all of which show close before open - and then the exceptional pot-peat and head-hid. But of course these two are accountable for on semantic grounds. So it's height all the way without exception. This also accounts for what C&R see as the exceptional ooh-aah ... – Araucaria - Him Nov 30 '15 at 15:32
-
@JohnLawler ... which, of course is close before open, but back before front. Do you agree, or am I missing something? – Araucaria - Him Nov 30 '15 at 15:32
-
Some words of this kind are formed by reduplication:-
- Linguistics a. To double (the initial syllable or all of a root word) to produce an inflectional or derivational form. b. To form (a new word) by doubling all or part of a word.
although crisscross isn't formed this way:-
[Alteration of Middle English Cristcrosse, mark of a cross, short for Cristcross (me speed), may Christ's cross (give me success).]
it would appear that riff-raff:-
[Middle English riffe raffe, from rif and raf, one and all, from Anglo-Norman rif et raf, rifle et rafle : Old French rifler, to rifle; see rifle2 + Old French raffler, to carry off (from raffle, act of seizing; see raffle).]
and hoo-haa:-
1930–35; probably < Yiddish hu-ha to-do, uproar, exclamation of surprise; compare Polish hu-ha exclamation of joy
are, if you track them back to the original languages.
- 36,868
Words in which only one sound is different are called minimal pairs.
- 140,205
-
4But I think that isn’t what he’s asking about. I think he wants to know about the very frequent coinages from reduplication. See my answer. – tchrist Sep 03 '12 at 20:57